Skip to main content
Log in

Turing's Two Tests for Intelligence*

  • Published:
Minds and Machines Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

On a literal reading of `Computing Machinery and Intelligence', Alan Turing presented not one, but two, practical tests to replace the question `Can machines think?' He presented them as equivalent. I show here that the first test described in that much-discussed paper is in fact not equivalent to the second one, which has since become known as `the Turing Test'. The two tests can yield different results; it is the first, neglected test that provides the more appropriate indication of intelligence. This is because the features of intelligence upon which it relies are resourcefulness and a critical attitude to one's habitual responses; thus the test's applicablity is not restricted to any particular species, nor does it presume any particular capacities. This is more appropriate because the question under consideration is what would count as machine intelligence. The first test realizes a possibility that philosophers have overlooked: a test that uses a human's linguistic performance in setting an empirical test of intelligence, but does not make behavioral similarity to that performance the criterion of intelligence. Consequently, the first test is immune to many of the philosophical criticisms on the basis of which the (so-called) `Turing Test' has been dismissed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Churchland, P.A. (1996), 'Learning and Conceptual Change: The View from the Neurons', in A. Clark and P.J.R. Millican, eds., Connectionism, Concepts and Folk Psychology: The Legacy of Alan Turing, Vol. 2, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dennett, D.C. (1998), 'Can Machines Think?' in Brainchildren, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Descartes, R. (1987), Discourse on Method, Cottingham, J. (Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dick, P.K. (1982), Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, New York: Ballantine Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, H.L. (1979) What Computers Can't Do, Revised Edition. New York: Harper Colophon Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, R.M. (1990). 'Subcognition and the Limits of the Turing Test', Mind 99.

  • Genova, J. (1994), 'Turing's Sexual Guessing Game', Social Epistemology 8(4), pp. 313-326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunderson, K. (1964), 'Descartes, LaMettrie, Language, and Machines', Philosophy 39, pp. 193-222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haugeland, J. (1985), Artificial Intelligence: The Very Idea, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, P. and Ford, K. (1995), 'Turing Test Considered Harmful', Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCA195-1). Montreal, Quebec, Canada. pp. 972-997.

  • Heil, J. (1998), Philosophy of Mind: A Contemporary Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, A. (1983), Alan Turing: The Enigma, New York: Simon and Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D.R. (1981), 'A Coffeehouse Conversation', Scientific Americans, May 1981, pp. 15-36.

  • Hofstadter, D.R. (1985), Metamagical Themas, New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D.R. (1996), 'Analogy-Making, Fluid Concepts, and Brain Mechanisms', Connectionism, Concepts, and Folk Psychology: The Legacy of Alan Turing. Vol. II, Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 195-247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leiber, J. (1991), An Invitation to Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massey, G.J. and Boyle, D.A. (1999), 'Descartes's Tests for (Animal) Mind' (forthcoming, Philosophical Topics 27, Special Issue on Zoological Philosophy and Philosophical Ethology).

  • Michie, D. (1993), 'Turing's Test and Conscious Thought', Artificial Intelligence 60, pp. 1-22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moor, J.H. (1992), 'Turing Test', Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2nd Edition, New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 1625-1627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moor, J.H. (1976), 'An Analysis of the Turing Test', Philosophical Studies 30, pp. 249-257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Piccinini, G. (2000), 'Turing's Rules for the Imitation Game', Minds and Machines 10, pp. 573-582.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryle, G. (1949), The Concent of Mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. (1984), The Cognitive Computer, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shieber, S.M. (1994), 'Lessons From a Restricted Turing Test', Communications of the ACM; 37(6).

  • Traiger, S. (2000), 'Making the Right Identification', Minds and Machines (this volume).

  • Turing, A.M. (1950), 'Computing Machinery and Intelligence', Mind, 59, pp. 433-460.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turing, A.M. (1996), 'Intelligent Machinery, A Heretical Theory', Philosophia Mathematica, (3) 4, pp. 256-260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, R. (1997), 'The Lying Game', Wired, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 1997.

  • Whitby, B. (1996), 'The Turing Test: Al's Biggest Blind Alley?' in P.J.R. Milllican and A. Clark, eds., Machines and Thought: The Legacy of Alan Turing. Vol. 1, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sterrett, S.G. Turing's Two Tests for Intelligence*. Minds and Machines 10, 541–559 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011242120015

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011242120015

Keywords

Navigation